(February 24, 2017 at 3:20 pm)Aoi Magi Wrote:(February 24, 2017 at 2:51 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: This getting into semantics of what is considered God's direct guidance and what is considered not his guidance.
I would give a chance of those claiming to be intermediates between God and us. If they cannot show any wisdom of why they would be intermediates and cannot prove it, they you can let them be and even argue against them.
But without giving them even a chance, and just dismissing them because there happens to be mathematically more wrong religions, is lazy. If there is a true religon, most religions would be false. If there is no religion that is true, only one more religion would be false.
Therefore talking about majority of religions or believers of different religions not presenting a good case, if you look it objectively, doesn't really mean much.
Nope, before you get into the guidance bit, theres the part about defining the creator from whom the guidance is coming. And the confirmation bias starts right from there. Going by what you are calling the "reverse approach", one has to first choose the best description of god that matches their own imagination, before examining the proofs being presented.
Not true. You can just eliminate religions you know are very irrational. And keep studying religions that you see as possible. When doing this, you may come across arguments for the divine and for the proper religion and sect, and then you can further study different perceptions and perhaps come across many solid arguments and evidence for God. All I'm saying if God made a case for himself, it would be best found in the proper revelation and teachings of the truly chosen leaders he appointed, if he did appoint leaders and reveal a revelation. All I'm saying is give God a chance to prove himself through studying various claims of his revelation because you may come across his actual revelation that would make a compelling case to you.
We are not even arguing in this thread that God exists nor a particular religion is true. I am just arguing perhaps this going backwards approach might lead somewhere if God exists and true religion exists. I would not rule out this possibility just because people fail to present the case for God well.
